Search (62 results, page 2 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  1. Shah, B.; Raghavan, V.; Dhatric, P.; Zhao, X.: ¬A cluster-based approach for efficient content-based image retrieval using a similarity-preserving space transformation method (2006) 0.01
    0.011159557 = product of:
      0.022319114 = sum of:
        0.022319114 = product of:
          0.044638228 = sum of:
            0.044638228 = weight(_text_:b in 6118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044638228 = score(doc=6118,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 6118, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6118)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The techniques of clustering and space transformation have been successfully used in the past to solve a number of pattern recognition problems. In this article, the authors propose a new approach to content-based image retrieval (CBIR) that uses (a) a newly proposed similarity-preserving space transformation method to transform the original low-level image space into a highlevel vector space that enables efficient query processing, and (b) a clustering scheme that further improves the efficiency of our retrieval system. This combination is unique and the resulting system provides synergistic advantages of using both clustering and space transformation. The proposed space transformation method is shown to preserve the order of the distances in the transformed feature space. This strategy makes this approach to retrieval generic as it can be applied to object types, other than images, and feature spaces more general than metric spaces. The CBIR approach uses the inexpensive "estimated" distance in the transformed space, as opposed to the computationally inefficient "real" distance in the original space, to retrieve the desired results for a given query image. The authors also provide a theoretical analysis of the complexity of their CBIR approach when used for color-based retrieval, which shows that it is computationally more efficient than other comparable approaches. An extensive set of experiments to test the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed approach has been performed. The results show that the approach offers superior response time (improvement of 1-2 orders of magnitude compared to retrieval approaches that either use pruning techniques like indexing, clustering, etc., or space transformation, but not both) with sufficiently high retrieval accuracy.
  2. Dang, E.K.F.; Luk, R.W.P.; Allan, J.; Ho, K.S.; Chung, K.F.L.; Lee, D.L.: ¬A new context-dependent term weight computed by boost and discount using relevance information (2010) 0.01
    0.011159557 = product of:
      0.022319114 = sum of:
        0.022319114 = product of:
          0.044638228 = sum of:
            0.044638228 = weight(_text_:b in 4120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044638228 = score(doc=4120,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 4120, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4120)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    We studied the effectiveness of a new class of context-dependent term weights for information retrieval. Unlike the traditional term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), the new weighting of a term t in a document d depends not only on the occurrence statistics of t alone but also on the terms found within a text window (or "document-context") centered on t. We introduce a Boost and Discount (B&D) procedure which utilizes partial relevance information to compute the context-dependent term weights of query terms according to a logistic regression model. We investigate the effectiveness of the new term weights compared with the context-independent BM25 weights in the setting of relevance feedback. We performed experiments with title queries of the TREC-6, -7, -8, and 2005 collections, comparing the residual Mean Average Precision (MAP) measures obtained using B&D term weights and those obtained by a baseline using BM25 weights. Given either 10 or 20 relevance judgments of the top retrieved documents, using the new term weights yields improvement over the baseline for all collections tested. The MAP obtained with the new weights has relative improvement over the baseline by 3.3 to 15.2%, with statistical significance at the 95% confidence level across all four collections.
  3. Jacucci, G.; Barral, O.; Daee, P.; Wenzel, M.; Serim, B.; Ruotsalo, T.; Pluchino, P.; Freeman, J.; Gamberini, L.; Kaski, S.; Blankertz, B.: Integrating neurophysiologic relevance feedback in intent modeling for information retrieval (2019) 0.01
    0.011159557 = product of:
      0.022319114 = sum of:
        0.022319114 = product of:
          0.044638228 = sum of:
            0.044638228 = weight(_text_:b in 5356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044638228 = score(doc=5356,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 5356, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5356)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  4. Hora, M.: Methoden für das Ranking in Discovery-Systemen (2018) 0.01
    0.011047398 = product of:
      0.022094795 = sum of:
        0.022094795 = product of:
          0.04418959 = sum of:
            0.04418959 = weight(_text_:b in 4968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04418959 = score(doc=4968,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 4968, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4968)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Discovery-Systeme bieten meist als Standardeinstellung eine Sortierung nach Relevanz an. Wie die Relevanz ermittelt wird, ist häufig intransparent. Dabei wären Kenntnisse darüber aus Nutzersicht ein wichtiger Faktor in der Informationskompetenz, während Bibliotheken sicherstellen sollten, dass das Ranking zum eigenen Bestand und Publikum passt. In diesem Aufsatz wird dargestellt, wie Discovery-Systeme Treffer auswählen und bewerten. Dazu gehören Indexierung, Prozessierung, Text-Matching und weitere Relevanzkriterien, z. B. Popularität oder Verfügbarkeit. Schließlich müssen alle betrachteten Kriterien zu einem zentralen Score zusammengefasst werden. Ein besonderer Fokus wird auf das Ranking von EBSCO Discovery Service, Primo und Summon gelegt.
  5. Behnert, C.; Plassmeier, K.; Borst, T.; Lewandowski, D.: Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme (2019) 0.01
    0.011047398 = product of:
      0.022094795 = sum of:
        0.022094795 = product of:
          0.04418959 = sum of:
            0.04418959 = weight(_text_:b in 5023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04418959 = score(doc=5023,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 5023, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5023)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag beschreibt eine Studie zur Entwicklung und Evaluierung von Rankingverfahren für bibliothekarische Informationssysteme. Dazu wurden mögliche Faktoren für das Relevanzranking ausgehend von den Verfahren in Websuchmaschinen identifiziert, auf den Bibliothekskontext übertragen und systematisch evaluiert. Mithilfe eines Testsystems, das auf dem ZBW-Informationsportal EconBiz und einer web-basierten Software zur Evaluierung von Suchsystemen aufsetzt, wurden verschiedene Relevanzfaktoren (z. B. Popularität in Verbindung mit Aktualität) getestet. Obwohl die getesteten Rankingverfahren auf einer theoretischen Ebene divers sind, konnten keine einheitlichen Verbesserungen gegenüber den Baseline-Rankings gemessen werden. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass eine Adaptierung des Rankings auf individuelle Nutzer bzw. Nutzungskontexte notwendig sein könnte, um eine höhere Performance zu erzielen.
  6. Dang, E.K.F.; Luk, R.W.P.; Allan, J.: ¬A retrieval model family based on the probability ranking principle for ad hoc retrieval (2022) 0.01
    0.011047398 = product of:
      0.022094795 = sum of:
        0.022094795 = product of:
          0.04418959 = sum of:
            0.04418959 = weight(_text_:b in 638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04418959 = score(doc=638,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.27401197 = fieldWeight in 638, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=638)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Many successful retrieval models are derived based on or conform to the probability ranking principle (PRP). We present a new derivation of a document ranking function given by the probability of relevance of a document, conforming to the PRP. Our formulation yields a family of retrieval models, called probabilistic binary relevance (PBR) models, with various instantiations obtained by different probability estimations. By extensive experiments on a range of TREC collections, improvement of the PBR models over some established baselines with statistical significance is observed, especially in the large Clueweb09 Cat-B collection.
  7. Ravana, S.D.; Rajagopal, P.; Balakrishnan, V.: Ranking retrieval systems using pseudo relevance judgments (2015) 0.01
    0.010901945 = product of:
      0.02180389 = sum of:
        0.02180389 = product of:
          0.04360778 = sum of:
            0.04360778 = weight(_text_:22 in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04360778 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    18. 9.2018 18:22:56
  8. Chang, C.-H.; Hsu, C.-C.: Integrating query expansion and conceptual relevance feedback for personalized Web information retrieval (1998) 0.01
    0.010792375 = product of:
      0.02158475 = sum of:
        0.02158475 = product of:
          0.0431695 = sum of:
            0.0431695 = weight(_text_:22 in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0431695 = score(doc=1319,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1319, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1319)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:08:06
  9. Kanaeva, Z.: Ranking: Google und CiteSeer (2005) 0.01
    0.010792375 = product of:
      0.02158475 = sum of:
        0.02158475 = product of:
          0.0431695 = sum of:
            0.0431695 = weight(_text_:22 in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0431695 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 3.2005 16:23:22
  10. Zhu, B.; Chen, H.: Validating a geographical image retrieval system (2000) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 4769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=4769,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 4769, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4769)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  11. Drucker, H.; Shahrary, B.; Gibbon, D.C.: Support vector machines : relevance feedback and information retrieval (2002) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 2581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=2581,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 2581, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2581)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  12. Dominich, S.; Skrop, A.: PageRank and interaction information retrieval (2005) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 3268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=3268,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 3268, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3268)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The PageRank method is used by the Google Web search engine to compute the importance of Web pages. Two different views have been developed for the Interpretation of the PageRank method and values: (a) stochastic (random surfer): the PageRank values can be conceived as the steady-state distribution of a Markov chain, and (b) algebraic: the PageRank values form the eigenvector corresponding to eigenvalue 1 of the Web link matrix. The Interaction Information Retrieval (1**2 R) method is a nonclassical information retrieval paradigm, which represents a connectionist approach based an dynamic systems. In the present paper, a different Interpretation of PageRank is proposed, namely, a dynamic systems viewpoint, by showing that the PageRank method can be formally interpreted as a particular case of the Interaction Information Retrieval method; and thus, the PageRank values may be interpreted as neutral equilibrium points of the Web.
  13. Lin, J.; Katz, B.: Building a reusable test collection for question answering (2006) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 5045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=5045,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 5045, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5045)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  14. Cecchini, R.L.; Lorenzetti, C.M.; Maguitman, A.G.; Brignole, N.B.: Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for context-based search (2010) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 3482) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=3482,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 3482, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3482)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Formulating high-quality queries is a key aspect of context-based search. However, determining the effectiveness of a query is challenging because multiple objectives, such as high precision and high recall, are usually involved. In this work, we study techniques that can be applied to evolve contextualized queries when the criteria for determining query quality are based on multiple objectives. We report on the results of three different strategies for evolving queries: (a) single-objective, (b) multiobjective with Pareto-based ranking, and (c) multiobjective with aggregative ranking. After a comprehensive evaluation with a large set of topics, we discuss the limitations of the single-objective approach and observe that both the Pareto-based and aggregative strategies are highly effective for evolving topical queries. In particular, our experiments lead us to conclude that the multiobjective techniques are superior to a baseline as well as to well-known and ad hoc query reformulation techniques.
  15. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Fleet, C. van: Opening the black box of "relevance work" : a domain analysis (2012) 0.01
    0.009469198 = product of:
      0.018938396 = sum of:
        0.018938396 = product of:
          0.037876792 = sum of:
            0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037876792 = score(doc=247,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 247, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=247)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  16. Joss, M.W.; Wszola, S.: ¬The engines that can : text search and retrieval software, their strategies, and vendors (1996) 0.01
    0.009250606 = product of:
      0.018501213 = sum of:
        0.018501213 = product of:
          0.037002426 = sum of:
            0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 5123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037002426 = score(doc=5123,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5123, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5123)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    12. 9.1996 13:56:22
  17. Kelledy, F.; Smeaton, A.F.: Signature files and beyond (1996) 0.01
    0.009250606 = product of:
      0.018501213 = sum of:
        0.018501213 = product of:
          0.037002426 = sum of:
            0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 6973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037002426 = score(doc=6973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6973, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
  18. Crestani, F.; Dominich, S.; Lalmas, M.; Rijsbergen, C.J.K. van: Mathematical, logical, and formal methods in information retrieval : an introduction to the special issue (2003) 0.01
    0.009250606 = product of:
      0.018501213 = sum of:
        0.018501213 = product of:
          0.037002426 = sum of:
            0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037002426 = score(doc=1451,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1451, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1451)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2003 19:27:36
  19. Fan, W.; Fox, E.A.; Pathak, P.; Wu, H.: ¬The effects of fitness functions an genetic programming-based ranking discovery for Web search (2004) 0.01
    0.009250606 = product of:
      0.018501213 = sum of:
        0.018501213 = product of:
          0.037002426 = sum of:
            0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037002426 = score(doc=2239,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2239, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2239)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    31. 5.2004 19:22:06
  20. Furner, J.: ¬A unifying model of document relatedness for hybrid search engines (2003) 0.01
    0.009250606 = product of:
      0.018501213 = sum of:
        0.018501213 = product of:
          0.037002426 = sum of:
            0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037002426 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2717, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2717)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    11. 9.2004 17:32:22

Years

Languages

  • e 51
  • d 11

Types

  • a 59
  • m 1
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…